Reducing the time before consulting with symptoms of lung cancer:a randomised controlled trial in primary care

Background: Most individuals with lung cancer have symptoms for several months before presenting to their GP. Earlier consulting may improve survival. Aim: To evaluate whether a theory-based primary care intervention increased timely consulting of individuals with symptoms of lung cancer. Design and setting: Open randomised controlled trial comparing intervention with usual care in two general practices in north-east Scotland. Method: Smokers and ex-smokers aged ≥55 years were randomised to receive a behavioural intervention or usual care. The intervention comprised a single nurse consultation at participants' general practice and a self-help manual. The main outcomes were consultations within target times for individuals with new chest symptoms (≤3 days haemoptysis, ≤3 weeks other symptoms) in the year after the intervention commenced, and intentions about consulting with chest symptoms at 1 and 6 months. Results: Two hundred and twelve participants were randomised and 206 completed the trial. The consultation rate for new chest symptoms in the intervention group was 1.19 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.92 to 1.53; P = 0.18) times higher than in the usual-care group and the proportion of consultations within the target time was 1.11 (95% CI = 0.41 to 3.03; P = 0.83) times higher. One month after the intervention commenced, the intervention group reported intending to consult with chest symptoms 31 days (95% CI = 7 to 54; P = 0.012) earlier than the usual care group, and at 6 months this was 25 days (95% CI = 1.5 to 48; P = 0.037) earlier. Conclusion: Behavioural intervention in primary care shortened the time individuals at high risk of lung disease intended to take before consulting with new chest symptoms (the secondary outcome of the study), but increases in consultation rates and the proportions of consultations within target times were not statistically significant. © British Journal of General Practice.

A randomised controlled trial investigating the effect of lutein and antioxidant dietary supplementation on visual function in healthy eyes

Background & aims It has been suggested that retinal lutein may improve visual acuity for images that are illuminated by white light. Our aim was to determine the effect of a lutein and antioxidant dietary supplement on visual function. Methods A prospective, 9- and 18-month, double-masked randomised controlled trial. For the 9-month trial, 46 healthy participants were randomised (using a random number generator) to placebo (n=25) or active (n=21) groups. Twenty-nine of these subjects went on to complete 18 months of supplementation, 15 from the placebo group, and 14 from the active group. The active group supplemented daily with 6mg lutein combined with vitamins and minerals. Outcome measures were distance and near visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and photostress recovery time. The study had 80% power at the 5% significance level for each outcome measure. Data were collected at baseline, 9, and 18 months. Results There were no statistically significant differences between groups for any of the outcome measures over 9 or 18 months. Conclusion There was no evidence of effect of 9 or 18 months of daily supplementation with a lutein-based nutritional supplement on visual function in this group of people with healthy eyes. ISRCTN78467674.

Targets and self monitoring in hypertension: randomised controlled trial and cost effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether blood pressure control in primary care could be improved with the use of patient held targets and self monitoring in a practice setting, and to assess the impact of these on health behaviours, anxiety, prescribed antihypertensive drugs, patients' preferences, and costs. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Eight general practices in south Birmingham. PARTICIPANTS: 441 people receiving treatment in primary care for hypertension but not controlled below the target of < 140/85 mm Hg. INTERVENTIONS: Patients in the intervention group received treatment targets along with facilities to measure their own blood pressure at their general practice; they were also asked to visit their general practitioner or practice nurse if their blood pressure was repeatedly above the target level. Patients in the control group received usual care (blood pressure monitoring by their practice). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome: change in systolic blood pressure at six months and one year in both intervention and control groups. Secondary outcomes: change in health behaviours, anxiety, prescribed antihypertensive drugs, patients' preferences of method of blood pressure monitoring, and costs. RESULTS: 400 (91%) patients attended follow up at one year. Systolic blood pressure in the intervention group had significantly reduced after six months (mean difference 4.3 mm Hg (95% confidence interval 0.8 mm Hg to 7.9 mm Hg)) but not after one year (mean difference 2.7 mm Hg (- 1.2 mm Hg to 6.6 mm Hg)). No overall difference was found in diastolic blood pressure, anxiety, health behaviours, or number of prescribed drugs. Patients who self monitored lost more weight than controls (as evidenced by a drop in body mass index), rated self monitoring above monitoring by a doctor or nurse, and consulted less often. Overall, self monitoring did not cost significantly more than usual care (251 pounds sterling (437 dollars; 364 euros) (95% confidence interval 233 pounds sterling to 275 pounds sterling) versus 240 pounds sterling (217 pounds sterling to 263 pounds sterling). CONCLUSIONS: Practice based self monitoring resulted in small but significant improvements of blood pressure at six months, which were not sustained after a year. Self monitoring was well received by patients, anxiety did not increase, and there was no appreciable additional cost. Practice based self monitoring is feasible and results in blood pressure control that is similar to that in usual care.

A randomised controlled trial investigating the effect of nutritional supplementation on visual function in normal, and age-related macular disease affected eyes:design and methodology [ISRCTN78467674]

Background: Age-related macular disease is the leading cause of blind registration in the developed world. One aetiological hypothesis involves oxidation, and the intrinsic vulnerability of the retina to damage via this process. This has prompted interest in the role of antioxidants, particularly the carotenoids lutein and zeaxanthin, in the prevention and treatment of this eye disease. Methods: The aim of this randomised controlled trial is to determine the effect of a nutritional supplement containing lutein, vitamins A, C and E, zinc, and copper on measures of visual function in people with and without age-related macular disease. Outcome measures are distance and near visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, colour vision, macular visual field, glare recovery, and fundus photography. Randomisation is achieved via a random number generator, and masking achieved by third party coding of the active and placebo containers. Data collection will take place at nine and 18 months, and statistical analysis will employ Student's t test. Discussion: A paucity of treatment modalities for age-related macular disease has prompted research into the development of prevention strategies. A positive effect on normals may be indicative of a role of nutritional supplementation in preventing or delaying onset of the condition. An observed benefit in the age-related macular disease group may indicate a potential role of supplementation in prevention of progression, or even a degree reversal of the visual effects caused by this condition.

A randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in primary care against standard treatment for menorrhagia:the ECLIPSE trial

BACKGROUND: Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a common problem, yet evidence to inform decisions about initial medical treatment is limited. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) (Mirena(®), Bayer) compared with usual medical treatment, with exploration of women's perspectives on treatment. DESIGN: A pragmatic, multicentre randomised trial with an economic evaluation and a longitudinal qualitative study. SETTING: Women who presented in primary care. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 571 women with HMB. A purposeful sample of 27 women who were randomised or ineligible owing to treatment preference participated in semistructured face-to-face interviews around 2 and 12 months after commencing treatment. INTERVENTIONS: LNG-IUS or usual medical treatment (tranexamic acid, mefenamic acid, combined oestrogen-progestogen or progesterone alone). Women could subsequently swap or cease their allocated treatment. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the patient-reported score on the Menorrhagia Multi-Attribute Scale (MMAS) assessed over a 2-year period and then again at 5 years. Secondary outcomes included general quality of life (QoL), sexual activity, surgical intervention and safety. Data were analysed using iterative constant comparison. A state transition model-based cost-utility analysis was undertaken alongside the randomised trial. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were derived from the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) and the Short Form questionnaire-6 Dimensions (SF-6D). The intention-to-treat analyses were reported as cost per QALY gained. Uncertainty was explored by conducting both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The MMAS total scores improved significantly in both groups at all time points, but were significantly greater for the LNG-IUS than for usual treatment [mean difference over 2 years was 13.4 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.9 to 16.9 points; p < 0.001]. However, this difference between groups was reduced and no longer significant by 5 years (mean difference in scores 3.9 points, 95% CI -0.6 to 8.3 points; p = 0.09). By 5 years, only 47% of women had a LNG-IUS in place and 15% were still taking usual medical treatment. Five-year surgery rates were low, at 20%, and were similar, irrespective of initial treatments. There were no significant differences in serious adverse events between groups. Using the EQ-5D, at 2 years, the relative cost-effectiveness of the LNG-IUS compared with usual medical treatment was £1600 per QALY, which by 5 years was reduced to £114 per QALY. Using the SF-6D, usual medical treatment dominates the LNG-IUS. The qualitative findings show that women's experiences and expectations of medical treatments for HMB vary considerably and change over time. Women had high expectations of a prompt effect from medical treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The LNG-IUS, compared with usual medical therapies, resulted in greater improvement over 2 years in women's assessments of the effect of HMB on their daily routine, including work, social and family life, and psychological and physical well-being. At 5 years, the differences were no longer significant. A similar low proportion of women required surgical intervention in both groups. The LNG-IUS is cost-effective in both the short and medium term, using the method generally recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Using the alternative measures to value QoL will have a considerable impact on cost-effectiveness decisions. It will be important to explore the clinical and health-care trajectories of the ECLIPSE (clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in primary care against standard treatment for menorrhagia) trial participants to 10 years, by which time half of the cohort will have reached menopause. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN86566246. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 88. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The feasibility of determining the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of medication organisation devices compared with usual care for older people in a community setting : systematic review, stakeholder focus groups and feasibility randomised controlled trial

This project was funded by National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 50. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Study protocol of European Fans in Training (EuroFIT) : a four-country randomised controlled trial of a lifestyle program for men delivered in elite football clubs

Funding The EuroFIT study is funded by the European Union’s Seventh Framework Program for research technological development and demonstration under Grant Agreement no: 602170. The Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, is core funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health Directorates.

Effects of antenatal multiple micronutrient supplementation on lung function in mid-childhood : follow-up of a double-blind randomised controlled trial in Nepal

Date of Acceptance: 12/12/2014 Support statement: This study was funded by the Wellcome Trust (Ref 092121/Z/10/Z), who played no role in its conception, methods, analysis or interpretation. Funding information for this article has been deposited with FundRef.

Effects of antenatal multiple micronutrient supplementation on lung function in mid-childhood : follow-up of a double-blind randomised controlled trial in Nepal

Date of Acceptance: 12/12/2014 Support statement: This study was funded by the Wellcome Trust (Ref 092121/Z/10/Z), who played no role in its conception, methods, analysis or interpretation. Funding information for this article has been deposited with FundRef.

Data feedback and behavioural change intervention to improve primary care prescribing safety (EFIPPS) : multicentre, three arm, cluster-randomised controlled trial

Funding and trial registration: Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office grant CZH/3/17. ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT01602705.

The feasibility and acceptability of trial procedures for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial of a structured physical activity intervention for people diagnosed with colorectal cancer : findings from a pilot trial of cardiac rehabilitation versus usual care (no rehabilitation) with an embedded qualitative study

Funding This work is supported by the National Institute for Health Research—Health Service and Development Research, Project reference number: NIHR—HS&DR Project:12/5001/09.

An Audit and Feedback Intervention for Reducing Antibiotic Prescribing in General Dental Practice : The RAPiD Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial

Funding: This study was conducted as part of the TRiaDS programme of implementation research which is funded by NHS Education for Scotland (NES). The Health Services Research Unit which is funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates supported the study. The funder had no influence over the design, conduct, analysis and write up of the study.

Two parallel, pragmatic, UK multicentre, randomised controlled trials comparing surgical options for upper compartment (vault or uterine) pelvic organ prolapse (the VUE Study) : study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

The VUE study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme (project number 11/129/183).

The use of cardiac rehabilitation services to aid the recovery of patients with bowel cancer : a pilot randomised controlled trial with embedded feasibility study

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 4, No. 24. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Design and protocol for the Focusing on Clozapine Unresponsive Symptoms (FOCUS) trial : a randomised controlled trial

Acknowledgements Thank you to all the participants who agreed to take part in the trial. This study was supported NHS Research Scotland (NRS), through Chief Scientist Office (CSO) and the Scottish Mental Health Research Network, and the Clinical Research Network-Mental Health. We are grateful to the Psychosis Research Unit (PRU) Service User Reference Group (SURG) for their consultation regarding the design of the study and contribution to the developments of study related materials. We are grateful to our Independent Trial Steering Committee and Independent Data Monitoring Committee for provided oversight of the trial. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) programme (project number10/101/02) and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment. Visit the HTA programme website for further project information. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the HTA programme, NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health.